Archive for the 'Privacy' Category

The British Gestapo

3 Comments

spy-binocularsCivil liberties are, it seems, a dying breed in modern Britain. No longer is an Englishman’s - or anyone elses - home their castle. Now we are under surveillance by the state even when we are in our home:

The sex lives of council-tax payers are being secretly monitored by local authority inspectors to establish whether residents claiming single person’s discounts are really living alone.

Undercover snoopers are being used to find out how often lovers visit and whether supposedly single residents are sharing a bed every night with the same person…

Local authorities have adopted the techniques after the government urged them to carry out “spot checks” on properties where a single-person council-tax discount is claimed. Councils are also demanding that householders give access to their bedrooms in return for the single-person discount. (The Times)

A large state means a surveillance state. The more they provide, the more spies they have to employ in order to check up on us, to ensure that we are doing things as they say we ought.

The British way of life used to rest on the principles of liberty and freedom. There was no way that the government could justify spying on the people as a matter of course. The right to privacy was inviolable.

But in the years since the Second World War, that has all changed. We now have CCTV that watches us every day, and a government and councils that requires more and more personal information from us. And now they want to check our bedrooms for underwear.

This is, unfortunately, only a few steps away from 1984 and the telescreen.*

*Please note that this means that I believe that New Labour is setting an unfortunate precedent, not that their intention is turn the UK into Airstrip One.

Data (Not So) Personal

Add a comment

For crying out loud:

Analysis shows that beyond the child benefit fiasco, Government departments were last year losing data at the rate of more than 300,000 people’s details a month in the year to April it emerged last night.

Among the losses were the National Insurance numbers of 17,000 people and the theft of a laptop with encrypted details of 17,000 Sats markers… (The Telegraph)

By department:

  • Foreign Office: 190 people
  • Department for Transport: 3 million (+)
  • Ministry of Defence: 1 million (+)
  • Ministry of Justice: 45,000
  • Home Office: 3,000

Yes, we can trust the government with our personal data… Not.

The Database Question

Add a comment

No decision has yet taken by the government as to whether they will create a huge database containing a record of our phone calls, emails, and internet use.

The Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, said that it could be a “step too far for the British way of life”, and then asked the question:

Do we really want the police, security services and other organs of the state to have access to more and more aspects of our private lives?

The answer to this is, of course, no fucking way.

The government already has a whole load of databases containing our personal information, and haven’t exactly shown themselves to be all that good at protecting it.

Why do they need any record of our private communications? They are private for a reason - because they are bugger all to do with the government, or anyone else for that matter. Rather than literally bugging every single one of us, why can’t they just accept that it simply is none of their business and leave us alone?

What they already have is a step too far for the true British way of life. This database would just send it tipping right over - just like ID cardswould.

The government dosen’t need more databases and they already know more about us than they need to. What we the people need is fewer intrusions into our lives by the Big Brother state.

Understatement Of The Day

Add a comment

no2idFrom the BBC:

ID cards ‘could threaten privacy’

What do you mean could threaten privacy? They most certainly do! And beyond that, it is also possible to cliam that they don’t just “threaten” privacy, but they breach it.

ID cards are simply wrong. They are a massive - and completely unnecessary - intrusion in to our lives. Our lives do not belong to the governemnt, and neither does our information.

We are all far more than a magnetic strip or microchip in a plastic card.

I trust the government - not just this government, but any government - with my data about as far as I can throw them. Whilst it is not poissible for me to give the government none of my data, at least at the moment it is all separated amongst different databases and departments, so that it all cannot be stolen in one go.

The compulsory ID card scheme would unify all of my data in one place. And no databse or system is so secure as to be able to prevent all attempts to break in to it. Especially with this governments less-than-exemplary IT record.

Spank-gate

3 Comments

As TD has admitted that F1 is the only sport he really watches, I thought I’d save this for the weekly guest post instead of putting it ‘Bites.

That, and the visual images created by the News of the World’s classic reporting techniques when the story broke on Sunday morning meant I was too busy being violently ill to write about it myself. If you’re having breakfast, put the porridge down.

[Max Mosley, t]he son of infamous British wartime fascist leader Oswald Mosley is filmed romping with five hookers at a depraved NAZI-STYLE orgy in a torture dungeon.
Then, head bowed and tied up in chains, he is interrogated by a dominatrix before being chained up and LASHED so hard over a TORTURE BENCH that he WHIMPERS for mercy and has to have a wound dressing put on his backside. (News of the World)

I have commented on a couple of posts on the topic over the past week, but now the initial furore has passed, things a bit clearer to pass an objective eye over the entire fiasco - that will inevitably be suffixed “-gate”, so I’ll settle on “Spank-gate” until someone directs me to another title.

Mosley’s reactions has been very telling. As far I can tell, he’s not expressly admitted anything. But, he’s sueing the NOTW for “Breach of Privacy”. There’s no allegation of libel. Therefore, I think it’s safe in assuming that he did it.

I think that the debate in the past week can safely be divided into three camps.

First of all, there’s the “Innocent until proven guilty” camp. Fair enough, but I think it’s a bit naive given the evidence that exists. There is a video that was on the NOTW website, and I understand is still very much available around youtube etc. I don’t want to need to prick my eyes with a pin after seeing it, so can’t directly comment - but I understand it’s pretty damning.

Then there’s the “Max must go” camp. It’s a pretty large camp, with some pretty important people including Jackie Stewart, BMW & Mercedes, and a few publications. Thing is, it’s impossible not to draw a link between these publications and previous problems with Mosley. Tom Rubython has had a very torrid history with the FIA, and has written a very damning (if lengthy) comment on Mosley.

Given that there does appear to have been a “sting operation” to catch Mosley - why was Max the target? Well, the NOTW is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News International, along with the Sunday Times. The Sunday Times are presently being sued by the FIA after Martin Brundle decribed the governing body of acting in a “Witch Hunt”. Could just be a co-incidence, and like Mohamed Al-Fayed I make no accusations, but the brain can’t help draw its own conclusions.

There’s no doubt that his actions have brought the sport unwanted publicity. He could well be considered to have brought the sport into disrepute. It’s probably only a matter of time before Mad Max does indeed resign.

But, given what we know at the minute, I fall into the third camp. The “So What?” camp.
There’s too much invasion into people’s privacy at the moment. I doubt anyone doesn’t have some skeletons in the cupboard - but rarely do they impede on professional roles.

The NOTW were quick to pick up on the German / Nazi connection in Mosley’s “sex romp”. However, I don’t believe that if it had been anyone else caught in Mosley’s position, such emphasis would have been paid to it. Not that I’ve ever frequented one of these, erm, “establishments” - but surely these dominatrix scenarios draw on historical references, and I doubt German prisoner role plays are that unusual?

As far as I can see, no crime was committed. So, why should his private life have such an impact?

Thing is now, it has had an impact. And people are talking about it more than the sport. Mosley’s got to go. And whilst I’m not his biggest fan (he’s had some wacky ideas for the sport), I think it will be a shame. There’s no-one ideal to replace him, and a sudden transition of power is never good for any institution.